McCall v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McCall v. State

162 So. 2d 526, 1964 Fla. App. LEXIS 4639

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 3, 1964·No. No. 4203·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appealed order, denying application for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, was predicated on insufficiency of allegation in the motion for relief and must be affirmed. See Dias v. State, Fla.App.1963, 158 So.2d 766. Since the disposition of the motion in the lower court did not reach the merits of appellant’s claim, the order and our affirmance are without prejudice to any subsequent proceedings on proper motion under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1. See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963).

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and SHANNON and WHITE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The appealed order, denying application for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, was predicated on insufficiency of allegation in the motion for relief and must be affirmed. See Dias v. State, Fla.App.1963, 158 So.2d 766. Since the disposition of the motion in the lower court did not reach the merits of appellant’s claim, the order and our affirmance are without prejudice to any subsequent proceedings on proper motion under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1. See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963).

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and SHANNON and WHITE, JJ., concur.

McCall v. State, 162 So. 2d 526, 1964 Fla. App. LEXIS 4639 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

162 So. 2d 526 (McCall v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related